Plane's Sharp Turn Without Stopping

[donnlass]

Hi there this is probably the longest of long shots but maybe you whizzkids on here can help me

I saw a video on You Tube one of those extreme landings ones where a plane landed and when it reached the end of the runway did a very sharp left turn off the runway without coming to a stop or even barely slowing down.

Only thing is I cant remember which airport it was at or what airline and I wanted to show it to someone but there probably isnt much chance of finding it again unless someone has a copy or knows which one I mean.

I think it might have been on one of the Caribbean islands possibly but like I say I cant remember since it was a while ago.

If anyone knows which one it is please pretty please can you post it but if not then no probs lol dont ask dont get lol.


Many thanks

[Lord Spandex Masher]

This it?

[donnlass]

Spandex God Bless you thanks so much thats just the one I was looking for, brave pilot lol doing such a sharp turn, can the plane handle those on a frequent basis?


Thanks loads again

[Guest 112233]

A little bit of "Float"

I been on worse ( a 1-11 400 at Aldergrove -Wind shear, ouch) , there was a little bit of float and how short is the runway. However I would imagine from an energy management point of view, this is a demanding location and the video is actually a testament to the flexibility of the options afforded to the crew by the performance of the type of aircraft.

The thread title is very misleading IMHO.

CATIII

[Tableview]

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't performing a tight turn like that on the ground going to place a lot of potentially harmful strain on the landing gear, if not the airframe? I would have thought it would be very poor airmanship.

I don't see it as 'brave' just rather demonstrative of the sort of gung-ho mentality that makes flying in Central America rather more risky than in many other places.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Having watched many, many thousands of landings in my life I see nothing wrong with the turn-off at all.

[TopBunk]

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't performing a tight turn like that on the ground going to place a lot of potentially harmful strain on the landing gear, if not the airframe? I would have thought it would be very poor airmanship.

The poor airmanship was earlier on when he floated over halfway down the runway before touchdown when he should have gone around.

After touchdown the manoeuvre and turn off was good airmanship because the alternative was (much) worse - going off the end over a cliff face. Believe me that would have done a lot more than strain the landing gear/airframe!

Very poor decision making - possibly influenced by the lack of desire to have to fly the challenging approach again. I'm sure that they learnt a awful lot that day, as, hopefully by watching this clip have many others.

As the saying goes in aviation - there isn't enough time to learn from making all the mistakes yourself, so you'd better learn from the mistakes of others!

[Tableview]

I also thought it should have been a go-around, but that was a separate matter.

It just seems to me that landing gear structures aren't designed for lateral stress and that sharp turns at speed, specially under acceleration or deceleration, are best avoided, although as in this case the alternative may have been worse.

On a related matter, when an aircraft lands, is the runway exit it takes determined by the controllers, or is it the PIC's decision?

[TopBunk]

Tableview

Sorry to disagree, I don't see them as separate matters at all.

The first decision (to not go around but to land) led directly to the need for the second (the requirement for all-out braking and high energy turn off the runway) which may, or may not have stressed the landing gear possibly requiring some maintenance action before next flight.

Generally, when cleared to land, the runway is the pilots to use as required, and all of it if necessary.

It is never quite that simple though - it never is!

For example:

1. The might be a reduced length available due work in progress - this will usually be known well in advance and the pilot will plan accordingly. If insufficient length remains available, then the crew would normally ask for a longer runway if available all the way up to diverting somewhere else. Normally the operation would have taken this into account however at the planning stage.

2. Some countries (USA as an example) have a Land and hold short operation (LAHSO) where you are expected to land using a reduced length, often before a crossing runway used for take-offs or landings. Many international operators (often using larger aircraft) file their ATC light plan as 'LAHSO not approved', so this shouldn't be requested.

3. ATC may request you to 'expedite vacating' if another aircraft is raather close behind you. That is fine, but if you can't help it's not your problem. Having said that, MOST pilots will do all they can as they will have been the aircraft tight behind themselves many times.

HTH

[con-pilot]

The poor airmanship was earlier on when he floated over halfway down the runway before touchdown when he should have gone around.

Exactly. No excuse using that much runway up floating trying to achieve a smooth landing. He got away with it this time, but the next...

Besides that, I'm pretty sure I know the guy who was flying it and he was famous, or should I say infamous for using way too damn much runway trying to get smooth landings.

As the 'passengers' on the aircraft were deportees and/or prisoners, who the hell cares what they think of the landing. To be sure, I always tried to make the smoothest landing I could regardless of who was in the back, but not to the extent this guy did in this video.

He should have planted it on the runway or gone around. No excuse for landing as far down the runway as he did.

[DaveReidUK]

This is terrible - where is Walter when we desperately need one of his pithy, incisive comments ?

[LostYetAgain]

The undercarriage isn't designed to take large lateral loads, however I would have thought that sharp cornering was more likely to take the tyres (tires) off the rims rather than damage the landing gear.

"Greaser" landings aren't ideal in commercial operations. A positive touchdown is preferred especially when surface contamination is present (water, slush, snow) as this punches the rubber through to the runway surface giving positive contact and allows for better braking efficiency.

The runway exit to use is assigned by ATC, but may be of the form "Exit next convenient right". Safety is overriding here ... the pilot will not accept an exit that he/she can't sensibly make.